[Met_help] grid_stat netcdf files
John Halley Gotway
johnhg at rap.ucar.edu
Tue Jul 29 16:53:40 MDT 2008
Luke,
I added some print statements to the Grid-Stat tool, and I'm just not seeing the discrepancy you're seeing. For example, in the output below I've listed the values for the grid point (42, 113). The
RAW line says the value when it's first read into Grid-Stat. The IN line says the smoothed value. And the OUT line says the value that written out to the NetCDF pairs file.
As you can see, every time that grid point is read for the various variables and levels in your config file, the value stays the same from input through smoothing and to the output.
It occurred to me that perhaps it has something to do with how the winds are defined. In MET, if the winds are defined as grid-relative, then they're rotated to be earth-relative. MET only does this
if the GRIB resolution flag indicates that the winds are grid-relative. But in the file you sent me, they are not grid-relative, they're already earth-relative.
Is there anything else you think I should check?
John
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = -5.30005
JHG:IN (42, 113) = -5.30005
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = -5.30005
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 0.749837
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 0.749837
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 0.749837
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 11.1997
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 11.1997
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 11.1997
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 2.5698
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 2.5698
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 2.5698
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 6.29992
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 6.29992
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 6.29992
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 2.35006
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 2.35006
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 2.35006
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 3.79984
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 3.79984
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 3.79984
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 2.8798
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 2.8798
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 2.8798
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 12.5103
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 12.5103
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 12.5103
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 2.88001
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 2.88001
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 2.88001
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 24.03
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 24.03
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 24.03
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = -0.29015
JHG:IN (42, 113) = -0.29015
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = -0.29015
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = 47.9902
JHG:IN (42, 113) = 47.9902
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = 47.9902
JHG:RAW (42, 113) = -4.75991
JHG:IN (42, 113) = -4.75991
JHG:OUT (42, 113) = -4.75991
Luke Peffers wrote:
> Sorry, I'm running METv1.0 for now...haven't updated yet.
>
> Luke
>
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 3:20 PM, John Halley Gotway <johnhg at rap.ucar.edu>wrote:
>
>> Luke,
>>
>> I should have asked you this earlier, but are you running METv1.0 or
>> METv1.1?
>>
>> I assumed version 1.1, but the configuration file you sent is for METv1.0.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> John
>>
>>
>> Luke Peffers wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, I've sent the additional files.
>>> The arrays as seen below are labeled as lat, lon but the array sizes of
>>> the
>>> variables, for the global grid are of dimension Array[360,181], which is
>>> lon
>>> lat.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the help.
>>>
>>> Luke
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:56 AM, John Halley Gotway <johnhg at rap.ucar.edu
>>>> wrote:
>>> Luke,
>>>> Could you also please send along the config file you were using
>>>> (AFTAC_config_GS) and whatever you used to define the AFTAC masking
>>>> region? I assume that AFTAC is a polyline.
>>>>
>>>> I'm confused as to your question on the order of the arrays in the NetCDF
>>>> file. When I do an ncdump of the NetCDF file you provided and grep out
>>>> the variable definitions, I see what's listed below. The arrays appear
>>>> to
>>>> be ordered as lat, lon as described in the user's guide. However, in
>>>> METv1.0 I do believe they were ordered as lon, lat.
>>>>
>>>> I'll try running Grid-Stat on the files and dump out the valid data
>>>> values
>>>> on the input and output files to try to replicate what you're seeing.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>> float lat(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float lon(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_Z10_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P500_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P600_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P700_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P400_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P300_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_UGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_UGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_UGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float FCST_VGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float DIFF_VGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>> float OBS_VGRD_P200_AFTAC(lat, lon) ;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello;
>>>>> I am trying to plot the netcdf data, which is generated by grid_stat.
>>>>> However, the values in the .nc files don't seem to be correct. I am
>>>>> comparing 10-m winds from WRF and GFS. The data in the .nc files do not
>>>>> appear to be the same as the data in my original files (nowhere close).
>>>>>
>>>> I
>>>>
>>>>> have set the smoothing to 1*1 grid box and the values still appear to be
>>>>> way
>>>>> off. I will upload my files via ftp if you'd like to take a look.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, it seems that the arrays in the .nc files are stacked as
>>>>> lon,lat...the
>>>>> MET manual has them as lat,lon.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>
>>>>> Luke
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Met_help mailing list
>>>>> Met_help at mailman.ucar.edu
>>>>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/met_help
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
More information about the Met_help
mailing list